2 ms·

I think that's for the author and/or user to decide, not the browser.

• zeveb 10y ago
  The browser is the user agent: literally, it's the user's agent. If he doesn't wish it to do something, he can configure it to do something else, or he can fire it and get a different agent. And no, it's not for a web site author to decide to require JavaScript when his functionality doesn't require it: if he does that, he's simply wrong.
  • Spivak 10y ago
    > it's the user's agent I completely agree, but if I configure my agent to break some assumption you made in your code then I have no one but myself to blame. One can break just about any piece of software by messing with the environment in which it runs. It's a shame that we rarely check or document these kinds of dependencies.
    • pdkl95 10y ago
      You are, of course, free to make assumptions about the user agent and make your page break on some user agents, but that's very unprofessional and gives a bad first impression. Progressive enhancement isn't hard if you design the page right, so most people will get the fancier site while at least having a working minimal page in other cases. This is really just checking for capabilities before using them and checking return values for errors, which everybody should be doing anyway. Assuming JS (or any browser feature) is available is similar to skipping the check for NULL after calling fopen(3). Skipping error handling is an indicator of shoddy programming.